On 3/24/21 6:14 AM, thierry bordaz
wrote:
On 3/24/21 12:16 AM, William Brown wrote:
Hi WilliamOn 24 Mar 2021, at 02:12, thierry bordaz <tbordaz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Hi William Thanks for you review. Some answers are inlined in the mail below. On 3/23/21 12:33 AM, William Brown wrote:Hey there, I think that you also need: pwdOTPValidFromTime This way an admin can pre-configure all the OTP's and they only "become valid from" that time frame. IE think university enrollment. You can configure all the OTP's a month before, and they become valid at a specific datetime.That is a very nice idea. Note to be OTP the 'userpassword' of the account must be reset by an admin and the account inheriting password policy with OTP settings. Assuming 'pwdOTPValidFromTime' is the account operational attribute holding a precise time. How should it be computed ? Directly from a precise time set in the password policy or computed from a ' 'passwordOTPValidationDelay' (number of seconds after OTP reset time) or something else ?I think maybe it could be easy to visualise it. We have time going from past to future like: past ---------------------------------------------------------> future So we want a window of: * When can the OTP start to be used? * When is the OTP no longer able to be used? So my thinking is: past ---------------------------------------------------------> future ^ ^ ^ | | | otp created | | otp valid from | otp expire at So I would say otp valid from and the otp expire should be *absolute* date times in UTC.
Good idea of that graphic. I am sorry to be so slow to understand but still things are not clear.
There are the attributes of the password policy and the operational attribute of the user account.
I think you meant and I agree with you that operational attributes (in the user account) should be absolute date.
What is not clear to me is how to compute those operational attributes from the password policy.
I see three options:
- password policy contains absolute time (e.g. passwordOTPValidFromUTC) => account.validFrom = policyValidFromUTC
- password policy contains a delay after OTP create/reset (e.g. passwordOTPValidFromDelay) => account.validFrom = Now + policyValidFromDelay
- password policy contains both and if both are set we should give the priority to one or the other
If a password policy is a stable entry, then they should not contain absolute time. If we imagine password policy created on purpose to do a bunch of registration, then that is okay if they contain absolute time.
Do you think we should support password policy with absolute time ?
No we should not store actual times in the config. These time values need to live in the entry itself, just like passwordExpirationtime. Perhaps this is a good candidate to handle through the CLI (maybe even a new task that uses a filter, base, etc)?
Mark
thanks
thierry
And then within that otp valid from - expire at time window, we have the "max use" field of how many times it can be used. Does that help?I think you should make it consistent with passwordOTPExpDelay to pwdOTPExpDelay. Better, OTP means "one time password" so why is it "password one time password". Just make the attributes "OTPExpDelay" or whatever. Alternately make it pwdOT (password one time).ATM password policy ('passwordPolicy') only contains 'password*' attributes this is why I would prefer to keep 'passwordOTP*' (e.g. passwordOTPMaxUse, passwordOTPExpirationDelay, passwordOTPValidFromTime'). I agree that 'passwordOTP' looks weird ("password one time password") but the first 'password' is the way the password policy attribute are prefixed.Ahh I think I missed that this is using the userPassword and combined with passwordPolicy. That makes sense now. Still better to keep it consistent - all pwd or all password. I think you mix/match these ....Then the account operational attributes updated via password policy. There is a mix. 6 out of 10 start with 'password' (like 'passwordExpirationTime') 2 out of 10 start with 'pwd' (like 'pwdReset') The two remaining are 'retryCountResetTime' and 'accountUnlockTime'. I choose the 'pwdOTP' prefix because the feature is somehow related to 'pwdReset' and also I preferred a different prefix than the password policy.I think passwordOTPExpDelay can be remove if you have ValidFromTime instead.Why ? Registration should be done after Now+ValidFromTime and before Now+passwordOTPExpDelay. So the two are useful.I'd see above :)The OC should be named onetimepasswordPolicy instead.Do you suggest we have two password policies OC: passwordPolicy and OnTimePasswordPolicy. OTP relying on 'passwordMustChange' then OnTimePasswordPolicy should allow 'passwordMustChange'Ignore this comment - I think I missed about the passwordPolicy bit :)Hope that helps!Absolutely it helps a lot. Thanks ! thierryOn 22 Mar 2021, at 21:30, thierry bordaz <tbordaz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Hi, I wrote a small design [1] about OTP password policy that I would like to start implementing. Comments are welcome [1] https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/otp-password-policy.html best regards thierry _______________________________________________ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure— Sincerely, William Brown Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server SUSE Labs, Australia _______________________________________________ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure— Sincerely, William Brown Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server SUSE Labs, Australia
_______________________________________________ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
-- 389 Directory Server Development Team
_______________________________________________ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
